Steven Rhoads, author of "Taking Sex Differences Seriously," agrees with Prof. Putnam that women are much more social. But he focuses more on what he views as innate differences between the sexes. Men, he argues, are "fundamentally more selfish." Unlike women, "they're simply less interested in people. And they're less empathetic." According to Mr. Rhoads, the trick to getting them to volunteer lies in appealing to men's egos, even their sense of duty and heroism. "Men need to be needed," he tells me. "Make it clear: We need you and this is really important."

The media blares non-stop stories about perverts (men, of course, women can't be perverts--they are "educators of young men") snatching girls, police detectives and even Ms. America trying to entrap men on the internet, domestic violence committed by men only and teachers (usually male) going to jail or fired for abuse allegations, the Duke rape case etc. And the BB/BS can't figure out why any self-respecting man does not want to go within fifty feet of a child? Get a clue.

Around the Sphere

The Moderate Voice has a round-up of links taking readers to intriguing reading at weblogs representing various opinions from all over the blogo-you-know-what. Sadly, I saw at one of the links that blogger AubreyJ had a heart attack, but fortunately is recovering well and is the owner of a new heart stent. Go by and wish him well if you get a chance.

If Boys Do it, it's Sexist, if Girls do it, it's Liberating!

Is The Dangerous Book... sexist? While it encourages respect for girls, it does seem to treat them more as "the weaker sex" than as equals. In one grating passage, boys are encouraged to carry a handkerchief, among other things, for "offering one to a girl when she cries." Boys are reminded not to make a girl feel stupid if she needs help, but nothing is said about the possibility of accepting help from a girl, or losing gracefully if bested by a girl at some "boy" activity.

In the last paragraph of the article, Cathy mentions the new book coming out as a companion book for girls: The Daring Book for Girls. How much you want to bet that this book will not be seen as sexist at all? It will probably be viewed as a liberating book for girls. Yep, sexist if boys do it, liberating when girls to it. Yawn, same old story.

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Sound Off Connecticut!

I just did a radio show with host Jim Vicevich with "Sound off Connecticut," a CBS affiliate in Hartfort. We discuss the Mary Winkler case, women getting away with murder, the no touch rules in Fairfax, our man bashing society and domestic abuse. You can listen to my segment of the show here--under "Recent Episodes" on your left.

Monday, June 18, 2007

No Touching Allowed!

Thanks to several readers who sent me this story about the Fairfax middle school who has a new rule: "No touching allowed!"

Fairfax County middle school student Hal Beaulieu hopped up from his lunch table one day a few months ago, sat next to his girlfriend and slipped his arm around her shoulder. That landed him a trip to the school office.

Among his crimes: hugging.

All touching -- not only fighting or inappropriate touching -- is against the rules at Kilmer Middle School in Vienna. Hand-holding, handshakes and high-fives? Banned. The rule has been conveyed to students this way: "NO PHYSICAL CONTACT!!!!!"

.....It isn't as if hug police patrol the Kilmer hallways, Hernandez said. Usually an askance look from a teacher or a reminder to move along is enough to stop girls who are holding hands and giggling in a huddle or a boy who pats a buddy on the back. Students won't get busted if they high-five in class after answering a difficult math problem.

Typically, she said, only repeat offenders or those breaking other rules are reprimanded. "You have to have an absolute rule with students, and wiggle room and good judgment on behalf of the staff," Hernandez said.

This no touch rule seems wrong in so many ways, I don't know where to begin. I used to think schools were becoming like prisons, but honestly, prisoners have more rights. As one parent so aptly put it in the article, "how will you teach students right from wrong?" Indeed, how? For, if every behavior is seen in terms of black and white, how will kids learn where the boundaries are? Physical touch, along with adult guidance teaches kids where the boundaries are, no touching at all teaches them that normal expressions of behavior are aberrant--or that they have to sneak behind the backs of those in authority to get or show affection. What kind of lesson is that to teach?

Because we do not allow fighting of any kind, kids no longer know how to fight and when they become enraged, they go overboard and hurt others in ways that before were unimaginable. Kids can no longer be touched in appropriate ways so some engage in sex early as a way to get any kind of affection denied to them by society. Heck, most adults stay so far away from kids they don't know (or those they do know) for fear of being called a pervert or abuser that many kids lack for adult companionship and mentoring. So they grow up lonely. And patting a buddy on the back or a decent handshake is against the rules? Give me a break, no wonder kids are not learning manners-comradery and decency are now outlawed under the guise of "inappropriate touch." We cannot allow beuraucrats to teach our children that all human touch is bad. It isn't--even at (gasp!) school. The school should definitely reconsider the rule.

Women Dreaming of Sex More Often

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Happy Father's Day

Hope all you dads out there (and stepdads) are having a great day!

Update: I spent the morning getting flowers and taking them to the cemetary for my dad, Julius Smith, who died five and a half years ago. I so miss our Sunday morning talks--he was one of the most important men in my life. For those of you who wonder why I love men and support them, my father is one of the reasons. I will never forget what my father taught me about love and about life.